In a decision that could leave New York City with a $1.46
billion hole in its budget, a judge has nixed a plan to expand taxi service
outside Manhattan

Manhattan state Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron
issued his ruling Friday. He put the plan temporarily on hold in June, after
owners of the city’s signature yellow taxi fleets sued.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the plan would make travel
safer, easier and cheaper for millions of people, and make the city more than
$1 billion. Yellow cab owners said it would cut their business.

The plan would let the city sell 18,000 permits and allow
livery cabs to pick up passengers who hail them on streets in upper Manhattan
and the other four boroughs. Currently, only yellow cabs are permitted to do
that.

Taxi and Limousine Commission head David Yassky called
the ruling “disappointing,” adding “we will appeal right away,” in a message
posted on Twitter.

Yassky said yellow taxi owners can’t argue that medallion
values would drop because they didn’t after the outer-borough plan was
approved.

“Obviously the marketplace doesn’t think that allowing a
borough taxi to pick up in Brooklyn, Queens or Bronx hurts yellows at all,”
Yassky said.

Fernando Mateo, spokesman for the NYS Federation of Taxi
Drivers, said the decision brings relief to medallion owners and livery cabs.
They are currently working the outer boroughs and don’t want to risk street
hails without added security measures, he said.

“The ruling that this judge made will save two industries
in jeopardy of being destroyed,” Mateo said, adding the city needed to find a
better way to bring taxi service to those who need it.

Bhairavi Desai, of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance,
also expressed concern and cautioned against any new proposal that could
potentially “throw drivers under the bus and pit taxi and livery drivers and
riders against each other.”

Meanwhile, Michael Cardozo, of the New York City Law
Department, said “We are deeply disappointed by the Court’s decision, and will
be filing an immediate appeal. We are confident that the appellate court will
uphold the state law.”